(vo)while law enforcement in california was cracking down police in new york were told to go in the other direction. in september the police commissioner issued this order "a crime will not be charged to an individual who is requested or compelled to engage in the behavior that results in the public display of majijuana". that trick that hakeem jeffery showed us... >>they take something out, now its in public display, the handcuffs go on, these young men are run through the system. (vo)it's no longer allowed and never should have been. which means that if many of the stories we heard are true, "searched me found a bag of weed" "he took it out of my back pocket" "they didn't recover it from my hand, they recovered it from my cigarette pack" (vo)most of the people we met should never have been arrested. once again we asked the nypd to talk to us and again they declined.

it wasn't surprising; if we'd learned anything, it's that america's marijuana laws are a conflicted, unequally enforced mess, where one state's entrepreneur is the federal government's felon. and the ground is always shifting. >>so what's going to happen? >>we are going to see this issue fought out in the court of public opinion. it is in periods like this that we really see change happen. (vo)if recent history is any indication, it seems impossible to predict exactly what kind of change we can expect.

>> michael: coming up tonight, numbers, be they 2800 dead, 11 million undocumented or ten years since, they define where we've been, where we are and perhaps where we're headed. i'm michael shure. this is "the war room." [ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> michael: today marks the ten-year anniversary of the iraq war. hard to believe but it's been a full decade since headlines across the country heralded a

quote, targeted surgical invasion to top be saddam hussein. as we know there were no weapons of mass destruction and it was anything but targeted. the country itself is still plagued by violence and bloodshed. there were 16 car bombs, and one assassination leaving 52 dead and 180 wounded. all told 130,000 130,000 iraqi civilians have died since the war began. this country has lost 3400 troops and 100,000 more have been injured. john lewis today is not a day for celebration but a time when this nation should reflect upon the true meaning of our involvement in iraq. but the architect of this endless war are anything but self reflective. take donald rumsfeld, today he tweeted ten years ago began the long difficult work of liberating 25 million ricks all

who played a role in history deserve our respect and our appreciation. it did not go over well. some called him shameful, despicable murderous and immoral. others called him a wanker, self diluted fool. many don't like this guy. spending over $800 billion while other more popular frankly more necessary initiatives go unfunded. initiatives like curbing gun violence. the great silent killer here in the united states here at home. in fact, since the newtown tragedy exactly three months ago today more americans have been killed by guns than died on 9/11. you heard it right. that is staggering. more americans killed by guns than were killed in 9/11, yet

there is no rallying cry. gun legislation is withering before it even sees the light of day. today democrats dropped a key provision from their gun bill the assault weapons ban because harry reid said it didn't have the votes to pass. senator dianne feinstein who introduced the ban said it this way. i cannot fight the nra. the nra spends unlimited sums backed by the gun manufacturer who are craven in my view. i don't know what we can done other than drafting a bill. in asking for support and enabling something to pass in the senate now i could put a hold on the whole package but i'm not going to do that. so instead the rest of the gun safety bill will go forward without the assault weapons ban. of course there is a possibility it could be attached to a later bill but certainly there is not a guarantee. gun safety is fast becoming a low priority in washington.

and another is immigration. john boehner praised the bipartisan house group working on immigration legislation. >> there are a lot of issues in here that have to be dealt with and i think what this bipartisan group came up with is frankly a pretty responsible solution. >> michael: sounds like progress but of course this being washington self promotion is as much a priority as actual legislation. in these days no one is playing the game better than rand paul whose top priority seems to be positioning himself for 2016. in a speech in the hispanic chamber of commerce paul put him squarely in the middle of the debate. >> immigration will not occur until conservative republicans like myself become part of the solution. that's why i'm here today to begin that conversation and to be part of the solution. i think the conversation needs to start by acknowledging that

we aren't going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants. if you wish to live and work in america, then we will find a place for you. >> michael: okay, sounds like he wants to find a way for undocumented immigrants to become citizens, well, not so fast. afterwards paul backpedaled saying while he wants to allow undocumented immigrants to stay he didn't want to pass citizenship. he said candidate we just have reform and then refer to it? wow, great way to say. representative yarmoth. what is happening with your fellow kentuckian rand paul, is this coming down to a path to citizenship? >> i get along with rand paul but this is silly. he obviously doesn't have much respect for the intelligence of

his audience in if he doesn't think that people can't see through that. we have 11 million people in the country give or take some number who are here without documentation, and we need to find a way to keep them here. everybody is committed to doing that so to worry about what you call it is kind of beside the point. if you're going to allow people here they're going to become citizens one way or another. >> michael: it seems to me congressman that rand paul is thinking solely about 2016, he's just forward thinking about himself. he said he hasn't decided if he's going to run for president. do you think he will? it's a gut question, do you think he has a shot at the nomination, and then at the presidency if he does run? >> well, i think he will run. i think it is highly unlikely that they would be the nominee of the party but certainly if he were the nominee of the party he would give the american people a very clear choice, and

as a democrat i would be very happy with that choice. >> michael: i'm thinking about choices that people would be happy about. i'm into this politics stuff congressman, and the words senator yarmuth would sound good to me. tell me about 2014. does ashley judd have a shot at it, and will you put your hat in that ring? >> i don't want to do it, i don't want to be in the senate. i love my senate and i enjoy representing it. to be honest i don't want to spend the next 18 months of my life traveling around the country raising money. ashley judd won't have to do that. she'll get $20 million worth of free media. she'll be able to raises as much money as she needs. the most important thing is that mitch mcconnell is extremely vulnerable in the commonwealth of kentucky. all the polling shows that, there is virtually no excitement anywhere in kentucky for his

re-election. it doesn't mean some people aren't going to vote to reelect him but only 17% of the people in kentucky, or voters in kentucky said they would definitely reelect him. only 37% of republicans. that's not a place to be if you're trying to be re-elected for the sixth time. >> michael: not looking good for mitch. let's turn to a more sober topic, the topic of guns. i remember you coming out so poignanty after the days in new town and kentucky. it's not an easy way to talk about guns in kentucky. let's talk about it the way that dianne feinstein did. is it impossible the way she said to fight the nra? >> it's not impossible to fight the nra. the senate made a mistake in bringing the assault weapons ban to the floor first. that's not only the hardest thing of all the ways we can--the proposals we're proposing or talking about for

gun safety. it's not only the most difficult to past but it's the one that makes the least difference. first we're talking about background checks and then high capacity magazines and then trafficking weapons. i wish they wouldn't have brought this first because it's the easiest one to defeat. i think we'll still make progress on gun safety legislation but we can take on the nra. michael bloomberg has proven that a number of times just in recent history. you'll see example after example of people who are up front who do it unabashedly and are able to either win or retain our office because of it. >> michael: tell us who follow politics a little bit how this works. let's say all that comes out of this in a pessimistic way the ban on straw purchases and that's it. when do guns come back again. does the issue just fly away

once it's defeated? >> i don't think it will ever go away. i was back in my district over the weekend talking to pta members saying when are you going to mobilize your membership? when are you going to go after the education communicate, the teachers to come out and make a stand? they're working on that right now. so i think the momentum is not going to die. i think you're going to continue to see efforts to, both on the federal and the state level to take action to promote gun safety measures, things that are wildly popular. even in kentucky, 75% of the citizens say they're for background checks. 65% of kentuckians say they're for registration for guns in the state. so again not all the action has to take place at the federal level. it can happen at the state level as well. >> michael: which is important to remember when you think about that being kentucky the kind of sentiment the kinds of guns

people have in this country. before i let you go, it is the anniversary of the iraq war and tell me what president bush's legacy as it pertains to the iraq war. >> well, i was a journalist in 2003 when the iraq war began. i editorialized. i looked at three different occasions we need to be careful about how we go to war. we need to be skeptical of the claims that the administration was making at that time. now i was sitting in a cheap seat. i totally confess that, but there were a lot of people at the time who understood that there was not a lot of credibility. the administrations claims. we know now that the administrations deliberately message whatever evidence we had deliberately lied about many things. i think ultimately his legacy with regard to iraq was that he was largely responsible for

taking 4500 lives and changing the lives of 30,000 other americans who were severely wounded in that conflict. i think ultimately history will judge him rather harshly. >> michael: yes, i think it's a sad and rather pathetic legacy when that is your legacy. i wish we had a congress full of john yarmuth. thank you for being here in "the war room." it's great to see. >> but it's great to see you. >> cenk: now from misguided priorities to priorities misguided by a higher pow. the inaugural macedon in his own humble style. he arrived in a jeep rather than the popemobile and he reached out to greet some of the 200,000 people who had come to see him among them was our very vice president joe biden, who chatted with the pope before the new pontiff offered this message to the crowd. >> embrace with tender affection the whole of humanity.

emergency the poorest the weakest, the least important. >> michael: it's a truly lovely sentiment but here is something less pleasant to think about. now that bide someone in rome and the president is leaver oh for the middle east, that leaves us for--wait for it--wait for it--john boehner in charge here at home. heaven help us. coming up, coming up let me state the obvious. if republicans want to get credit with latinos for pushing immigration reform, latinos will have to like what the g.o.p. are pushing. and the questions to be grappled with for the ages the costs are wrenching, and why is he going? what does he hope to achieve? we'll answer those questions as the president prepares to leave for israel. it's "the war room" on a tuesday, and we will be right back.

(vo) the answer in a moment. brought to you by expedia. expedia helps 30 million travellers a month find what they are looking for one traveller at a time. (vo) brought to you by expedia. expedia helps 30 million travellers a month find what they are looking for one

traveller at a time. [ male announcer ] it's red lobster's lobsterfest our largest selection of lobster entrees like lobster lover's dream or new grilled lobster and lobster tacos. come in now and sea food differently. visit redlobster.com now for an exclusive $10 coupon on two lobsterfest entrees.

(vo) she gets the comedians laughing and the thinkers thinking. >>ok, so there's wiggle room in the ten commandments, that's what you're saying. (vo) she's joy behar. >>current will let me say anything. >> this is where brew dense compassion and threat all points towards the same goal, bringing these workers out of the shadows

and into becoming and being tax paying members of society. >> michael: that's kentucky tea party senator rand paul's embrace of immigration reform. it comes a day after the republican national committee released their autopsy report on why the g.o.p. continues to nose dive in favorability. the recommendation is to support comprehensive immigration reform. the senator's move comes after the drone filibuster and the straw purchase. here is maria from the university of cal berkeley where she is the development director of the chief schuster earl institute. welcome to the war room. >> glad to be here.

>> michael: what do you make of his new stance? >> i think it's really a revelation, and i welcome yesterday's g.o.p. autopsy report. i think it is a recognition that if the republicans intend to be a national party, they have got to broaden their appeal to the fastest growing part of the electorate. but words are only one thing. let's see what they do in terms of actually voting for immigration reform. >> michael: yes, because they very rarely--if they intend to be a national party, they rarely do the things that would make you think that they actually intend what you say. that this is one of those words not deed things, it sounds like to me. >> absolutely. i read something this afternoon that just made my blood boil, which was a letter from--it's eight senators g.o.p. senators patrick leahy chair of the judiciary committee asking them

to slow down the process on immigration reform. it's such a big issue that the public really needed to debate it. six of the eight are fully familiar with the issues including senator orrin hatch, who has been in the senate, worked closely with ted kennedy knows these issues backwards and forward. mike lee from utah has been in the senate for two years maybe he doesn't know that much, ted cruz but-- >> michael: we've been debating it now for ten years. it reminds me of brown versus board of education and the deliberate speed. now is the time for speed on this issue. >> absolutely. >> michael: do you think there is a parallel between those two? >> i absolutely do. i was so astounded at the notion that there needs to be more time. it's been more than ten years. i'm very glad to see some republicans including senator rand paul are talking about a

path to citizenship. >> michael: that is important but senator paul did not use the word "citizenship" in his speech. nor did he use the term "pathway to citizenship" because of the polarizing term. what do you think about semantics here. >> well, here's the thing, i guess they think that latinos hispanic, are not as sophisticated. it's like 30 years ago if you wanted to appeal to the latino vote you went to fiesta, you ate a taco you said some spanish words as if that was enough. i guess they think that's the same thing. it's not about the words. it's about what policies are you going to promote and actually enact. we're much more sophisticateed than i think the republican party gives us credit for. >> michael: yes, that's a perfect example. the window dressing that this party has put on so many of their objects, it's amazing.

center paul's plan mostly aligns with the senate's bipartisan gang of eight. we talked about those other senators but he would not enforce raids on employers or expand electronic verification programs. are those two exceptions? do you want to say something to that? would those exceptions possibly appeal to latino voters? >> it will appeal to some but what rand paul is doing is carving out an historical carve out for employers known as the texas exemption from the 50s immigration law. it turns a blind eye to employers who liar undocumented. we have never actually tried to determine if people couldn't find a job here whether they would come. what happens is that we well know--i used to run the wage an hour division. i know about low-wage works who don't feel they have an ability to stand up for their rights.

in these industries lying ag, like construction like home care workers, the employers are looking to get the cheapest most exploitable workforce. if you don't have an employer verification system, and if you don't do raids. by the way i want toes to prosecute the employers, they are the ones who are breaking the law, not the employees who many are just trying to provide for our families and work. so let's make sure that we have legal channels for people to come into this country. let's make sure that they have the rights to stand up for themselveses and make sure that the employers do not get a pass by hiring an undocumented workforce just to exploit them. >> michael: as you talk about workers and latino workers it comes to mind that president obama nominateed tomas perez secretary of labor. does he help with what you're talking about? >> oh absolutely. 's terrific lawyer.

we worked together in the clinton administration. he really understands these issues. i think that you're going to see a very forceful advocate, and someone who is very knowledgeable and can really help the administration navigate in the coming months the negotiations on this issue of immigration reform. >> michael: and do you think then that we will see comprehensive immigration reform this year? >> you know, i have been working on this issue for over ten years, even when i was in the white house, you know, 13, 14 years ago. so i am cautiously optimistic, but the real--i actually saw what i guess boehner said something today about the secret committee in the house that is also very close to negotiating something, the bipartisan group. that is the first sign of that i've seen. it will be the house republicans who are worried about tea party challenges, challenges from the right.

they will be the obstacle. if there can be movement in the house, then yes i'm cautiously optimistic. >> michael: but there we go again. if there can be movement in the house i'm cautiously optimistic. i'm that way about guns, immigration, we're constantly saying that, then we sit back and say it didn't happen because there was no movement in the house. i know you're talking about that secret negotiation but as with john boehner as with speaker of the house the republicans majority in the house what we need in this country is ever going to happen? >> i think this will be a test if john boehner can be speaker for the country not just his party. the reason i say this is he's got to be willing to let the house vote on a comprehensive immigration bill even if the majority of republicans are unwilling to do so. we just need a few of them. we've got a good chunk of democrats. and if he is unwilling to do that, then frankly i think the

republican party will become like the whigs. a party that fades into oblivion because they were not able to respond to the changing demographics and the changing identify of america has been expanding the definition of who gets to be an american for 200 years. this is the time to make that expansion real and if boehner can't be the leader we need, then i think the parties are going to have real trouble. >> michael: yes, just lying the whigs, the willard fillmores of the day. maria escheves z. thank you for coming on. >> michael: we have more next right here in the war room.

they think this world isn't big enough for the both of them. but we assure you - it is. bites. little greatness. a closer shave in a single stroke for less irritation, even on sensitive skin. ♪ ♪ gillette mach3 sensitive. gillette. the best a man can get.

>> michael: today marks ten years since the start of the war in iraq. more than 1.6 million americans served in the protracted conflict which took the lives of 4,488 u.s. soldiers and cost over $800 billion. let's look back in time and see what the architect of this war said how long this war would take and how much it would cost. >> office of management and budget estimated it would be under $50 billion. >> up to $300 billion. >> bolognabaloney. >> with the higher end production such as the notion it will take several hundred thousand troops to provide stability to iraq is wildly off the mark.

>> we'll be swift, strong, if we have to, we'll win. >> michael: they should all be in jail. not only were their estimates way off the mark, iraqis and americans are still dealing with the fallout of this horrible war. joining me is neta crawford, codirector of the costs of war. thanks for coming on "the war room" tonight neta. in financial terms how does the bush administration original estimate compare with the final bill? >> well, the administration was only counting on a few months of occupation and a very short war. their 30 to $50 billion to 50 to $60 billion or up to 100 to $200 billion were very wrong.

the number that you keep talking about is quite low too. if you would like i'll explain why that is. >> michael: yes, please do. >> okay, so the number you're giving, $800 billion is the dod that is meant gone spending special appropriations for the war and the state department appropriations for iraq. but you have to add to that the other costs of the war that we've already paid. for example the va has already begun treating veterans who have returned from the war. they get medical and disability. there is a growth in homeland security spending that occurs because if you remember the alerts went up when we went to war, and in some cases stayed up for some time. there was increase need for homeland security. then there were interest costs that we already accrued for the money borrowed to pay for the war. that actually comes to $1.7 trillion.

>> michael: it's a tremendous amount of money. of course, yeah, we rely on these numbers that were the allocations, the appropriations from congress. but the numbers are just bigger and bigger. there is a fraction of your estimated 6 trillion-dollar total what makes up the bulk of the figure of the 6 trillion-dollar? >> well, there's the pentagon spending. >> michael: right. >> and the then if you look at over time there is long-term costs. i was talking about the costs to 2013, the fiscal year. but if we project out to the next 40 years we know two things will happen: first we bought something rather large, which is this war almost entirely by borrowing. the interest on borrowing the war will be several trillion dollars. it depends on how you pay down this borrowing but that's a large chunk of the cost. in fact, interest costs costs

overwhelm the interest spending the $800 billion of dod and state and so on. but the other major factor over the next 40 years we know that the soldiers who become veterans leave active duty will draw on veterans disability benefits to a greater degree as they age. when they come back from iraq sicker than when they come back from other wars. >> michael: something that we don't think about. the cost of doing the war and then the cost of taking care of people when they come home. many democrats signed off on the war but there were a lot of early concern about the bush administration's predictions both dollars and american troops. here is joe biden in 2003. he was senator then. >> we have not slewed the incremental costs of our fighting forces in iraq, nor the cost of reconstruction. >> why? >> simply because we don't know what they will be.

>> oh, come on, now is anybody here at the table think we're going to be down below 100,000 forces in the next calendar year? raise your hand, any one of you. you know it's going to be more. you know at least it's going to be $2.5 billion a month. give me a break will you? when you guys start being honest with us? >> biden essentially calling them liars. is there evidence back in 2003 that these prediction was be wildly off the mark like they are? >> the predictions that this would be a short occupation were just--i don't know. they were thoroughs-colored glasses in your best case scenario yes. but as soon as you knew there would be any kind of resistence, and that you need to reconstruct, which is the obligation of the open occupier, and you needed to provide security, which is the obligation of the

occupier, this would be a large tap. >> michael: and it went over to human being costs 134 iraqi civilians have been killed. you estimate that could be four times higher? >> right, the thing you have to keep in mind about civilian deaths in iraq is that we know that many deaths are recorded. that is, the ministry of health releases information. they are recorded in newspapers, and i tried to be clear what we're talking about is the recorded deaths. but many deaths were not recorded. in fact, iraq body count estimates it could be twice as many deaths directly by violence. then there is the indirect kill. the direct kill something that violent death when someone steps on a cluster bomb or is hit by a cross fire or by a bomb. but the obviously there are many other ways that you can die in these wars, and one way is

through indirect harm such as when you don't have safe drinking water, you can't get access to a physician or healthcare or medicine or immunization stopped because your clinic is destroyed. in other words rippling out over many years are the consequences of the destruction of iraqi infrastructure. >> michael: it is so painfully obvious, neta crawford, thanks for coming in to share with us this despicable anniversary. we really appreciate your insights. up next is the president's trip to israel a vital diplomatic mission or a vital photo-op. we'll more on that right after the break. for true stories. with award winning documentaries that take you inside the headlines. real, gripping, current. documentaries... on current tv.

um, hello. these ugly stains are ruining my good looks and style. and good luck using that cleaner. excuse me, miss ? he's right. those are tough hard water stains, and that cleaner's not gonna cut it. truth is, 85% of us have hard water and many don't even know it. you need lime-a-way. lime-a-way is specially formulated to conquer hard water stains. it's 4 times more effective at removing lime scale than the leading bathroom cleaner. see the lime-a-way difference or your money back. [ male announcer ] shaving can be a sensitive issue. upgrade to gillette fusion proglide. our micro-thin blades are thinner than a surgeon's scalpel to put less stress on your skin by gliding through hair. fusion proglide from gillette. the best a man can get.

[ ♪ theme music ♪ ] >> michael: tonight president obama begins a journey that will put to rest one of the right's biggest criticisms, that he never visited israel during his presidency. the trip kicks off tomorrow in jerusalem when president obama has separate meetings with israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu and president shimon peres. it will be followed with a return to israel for a teach at the jerusalem international convention center. the back and forth continues on friday to a trip of bethlehem and the west bank for a visit to the church and the nativity. that's the oldest operating christian church in the world. then back to israel to visit the yah vashem holocaust memorial

and israel's national cemetery. >> the bonds between the united states and israel are unbreakable, and the commitment of the united states to the security of israel is iron clad. [ ♪ music ♪ ] >> michael: we're not sure to make that have video but hopefully our next guest does. with us to break down the ins and outs of the president's trip is janine zacharia. welcome back inside "the war room"." >> hi, how are you doing. >> michael: well what do president obama stops tell us

about who the audience for this trip is? is it for american voters israeli political makers, iran, the arab? who is the audience. >> given that president obama is not running for re-election again nationally as far as we can tell i don't think it's for americans voters. extensiveextensively it's for the israeli who is felt jilted by him. we could take it on face valuable and say he's trying to make nice to the israelis, reassure them that he has their back vis-a-vis iran, that he sports them,'s not partial to the palestinians arabs and whatnot, and despite all the tension there has been between myself, president obama and benjamin netanyahu iran, that could be the other audience saying i'm going to stand with

israel against you. he might be trying to signal to tehran that even though he does not get along with benjamin netanyahu, the premier, he will thwart iran's nuclear program. this is a meet and greet type initiative. we'll have to see if something of substance comes out of it. i'm doubtful. >> michael: it sounds like you're doubtful. but tell us little bit more about that relationship that you alluded to. what is the relationship between obama and netanyahu like? >> it's very, very tense obviously. three years ago to the week is when vice president joe biden went to jerusalem, a trip that i covered for the "washington post," and to do the very same thing, make nice to israelis, to reassure them that they have u.s. support at a time when they feel isolated regionally and

internationally. that trip blew up when there was an israeli announcement during the trip of new settlement construction in east jerusalem. this led to a harsh rebuke by joe biden and kicked off three years of tension between the president and the prime minister. they have not been able to get on the same page to the county where president obama has really stopped talking about it. i'm not clear how much he's even going to talk about the palestinian issue on this trip. maybe indirectly but they really haven't had much of a meeting of the minds when it comes to the major core issues such as settlements, etc. then the real retrenchment from what president obama had hoped to do originally e. not to mention that netanyahu had overt public support for mitt romney during the presidential race, i'm sure that plays into the tension. this relationship, how does it shape how the two countries might be dealing with iran?

>> yeah, that's an interesting question and from talking to american israeli officials this relationship endures even when there is tension between the two leaders even though it doesn't help to have that kind of daylight between them when iran is watching all these signals. that's why this trip has toot a lot with the optics visa see iran. behind the scenes there are discussions going on 37 prime minister netanyahu said 2013 will be the year of decision. and that's why they want to be on the readiness of israel on the possibility that israel could strike unilaterally. so you know, they have a lot to work out on this issue specifically on mainly what is the red line and what point does military action become

inevitable? >> michael: there has been skepticism in this trip. a recent poll from the israeli newspaper asked israelis to describe president obama's relationship with their country. 38% described him as being hostile. 33% called him favorable. and 14% said that president obama was indifferent toward them. you said at the top that president obama is not running for re-election. does he need popularity in israel for any reason right now? >> well, he's not run running for primeisrael. chuck hagel was not running for prime minister of israel either. it is important for israelis to think that the president has their back. even though he pushed the israelis and palestinians to make a peace deal i remember

after he left obvious he did a mock poll in another newspapers who do you want to be the next prime minister clinton was polled up there pretty high. it does help for israelis to have a good warm feeling about the united states president. however at the moment when there is no peace process and nothing is happening i find the timing quizzical. it's almost a little bit unseemly. the tenth anniversary of iraq. what is going on in syria there are other regional issues that at the moment are more paramount. >> michael: that's true. it seems that if you don't have anything that you're trying to get done if you don't get it done you don't lose. that may be the silver lining for the president. janine zacharia. more to come, we'll show you more right after this.

>> has the time finally come for real immigration reform? >> with a distinctly satirical point of view. if you believe in state's rights but still believe in the drug war you must be high. >> only on current tv.

can become major victories. i'm phil mickelson, pro golfer. when i was diagnosed with psoriatic arthritis my rheumatologist prescribed enbrel for my pain and stiffness, and to help stop joint damage. [ male announcer ] enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including infections tuberculosis

lymphoma, other cancers, nervous system and blood disorders, and allergic reactions have occurred. before starting enbrel your doctor should test you for tuberculosis and discuss whether you've been to a region where certain fungal infections are common. you should not start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. tell your doctor if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores have had hepatitis b have been treated for heart failure, or if you have symptoms such as persistent fever bruising, bleeding or paleness. since enbrel helped relieve my joint pain, it's the little things that mean the most. ask your rheumatologist if enbrel is right for you. [ doctor ] enbrel, the number one biologic medicine prescribed by rheumatologists.

[ male announcer ] it's red lobster's lobsterfest our largest selection of lobster entrees like lobster lover's dream or new grilled lobster and lobster tacos. come in now and sea food differently. visit redlobster.com now for an exclusive $10 coupon on two lobsterfest entrees. >> michael: now for the best of the rest, stories that i don't want to you miss this tuesday night. first up today the committee on science, space and technology held a hearing on threats from outer space. utah representative scries stewart, he himself from out of space asked the panel if the government is obligated to inform citizens of an incoming as steroid. >> if we were to determine there was a threat and then determine even that it was actually potentially devastating, do we

have a policy as to whether we would share that information with the public and how we would do that? i don't know whether fema, which would have that responsibility has developed a former protocol, we can get back to that. >> i wish you would. i would be curious to know that. >> michael: i would be curious to know that too representative. according to today's testimony we're decade behind detecting as steroids capable ofas asteroids that are capable of destroying a city. speaking of threats from space, a nook north korean propaganda

film is bomb mongering mongering the united states. why does this make me feel like the president of the a.v. club is threatening us? and harrison ford was on the hill today testifying about planes and the issues of importance to the general aviation community. according to sam graves, ford is no strange for the aviation industry, as you can see here. >> get off my plane. >> michael: believe it or in the this is not the pilot of the millof themillennium falcon's first time speaking to the committee of aviation. we're talking about the big ships he bragged to congress making the tessl run in less than 12 parsecs wow. while we're on the subject of

heroic men leading sidekicks. how are you brett. >> i'm doing well. it's nice to be on the show. i'm freaking out, budget woes are on my mind. they threaten a lot of things, but usually its teachers, firefighters, police officers, the unimportant stuff. but now budget crises have turn turned their sights on something as vital to the american experience as the bill of rights itself the annual white house easter egg roll. i'm serious. when they sent out invites to this event they added a caveat if there is a government shut down there will be no easter egg roll. they say it is an unessential event and those things will be canceled in the event of a government shutdown. what is unessential about it?

what is beneficial what they're doing, this is professionally made teaser video of bo the white house dog searching for easter eggs in the area. [ ♪ music ♪ ] >> michael: i totally see your point, brett. i totally see it. what are you going to do about it? >> i have proposals in order to make back the investment they're making on the event. maybe even turn a profit. i have some power point presentation slides. the first proposal is corporate sponsorship. i say corporations will be able to get a child and it's kind of a nascar meets newborn thing. i think that will get money back. that's a good idea. the next idea is a big sport of mixed martial art. i'm thinking adding that and

we'll have a battle royal of children on the white house lawn. i'm calling it white house brawn where the white house becomes the fight house. i think-- >> michael: the white house is the fight house, i like it. thanks brett. thanks so much. love the ideas. hey, folks someone is always in our war room. check us out online at counter.com/the southland war room. thank you for checking us out on "the war room." have a great night. young turks is that we're honest. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us.

oh this is lame, investors could lose tens of thousands of dollars on their 401(k) to hidden fees. is that what you're looking for, like a hidden fee in your giant mom bag? maybe i have them... oh that's right i don't because i rolled my account over to e-trade where... woah. okay... they don't have hidden fees... hey fern. the junk drawer? why would they... is that my gerbil? you said he moved to a tiny farm. that's it, i'm running away. no, no you can't come! [ male announcer ] e-trade. less for us. more for you. [clucking]. everyone wants to be the cadbury bunny. cause only he brings delicious cadbury crème eggs, while others may keep trying. nobunny knows easter better than cadbury!